Immigrants from Jordan vs Immigrants from Oceania Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 142,625,384 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Oceania within Immigrant from Jordan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.728. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Jordan within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.386% in Immigrants from Oceania. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Jordan corresponds to an increase of 386.4 Immigrants from Oceania.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in householder income under 25 years ($51,370 compared to $53,680, a difference of 4.5%), median male earnings ($57,145 compared to $55,712, a difference of 2.6%), and wage/income gap (26.3% compared to 25.6%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($45,066 compared to $45,220, a difference of 0.34%), median household income ($89,412 compared to $89,100, a difference of 0.35%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($97,185 compared to $97,623, a difference of 0.45%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (12.4% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 9.5%), single female poverty (19.3% compared to 20.7%, a difference of 7.0%), and receiving food stamps (10.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 6.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 0.16%), single male poverty (12.5% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 0.58%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (15.8% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 1.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 11.3%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 8.4%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.5% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 4.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 0.040%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 0.050%), and female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.090%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.9% compared to 37.9%, a difference of 2.6%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.1% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 1.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.4% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.19%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.4% compared to 83.9%, a difference of 0.60%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (75.6% compared to 76.1%, a difference of 0.67%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.2% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 12.0%), births to unmarried women (29.0% compared to 30.6%, a difference of 5.6%), and single mother households (6.0% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (65.0% compared to 64.9%, a difference of 0.17%), family households with children (28.4% compared to 28.1%, a difference of 1.2%), and average family size (3.24 compared to 3.29, a difference of 1.4%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 17.5%), no vehicles in household (8.7% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 12.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.9% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 9.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (57.2% compared to 57.5%, a difference of 0.64%), 1 or more vehicles in household (91.4% compared to 90.4%, a difference of 1.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.9% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 9.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.0% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 10.6%), master's degree (16.1% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 10.0%), and bachelor's degree (40.3% compared to 37.3%, a difference of 7.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.0% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.17%), kindergarten (98.0% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.17%), and 1st grade (97.9% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.18%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.9% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 10.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 9.5%), and male disability (10.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 8.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 2.6%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 3.2%), and cognitive disability (17.0% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 3.6%).